SUBSCRIBE TO OUR Newsletter

New Report Finds ‘Plenty of Animals Harmed’ While Making Films

Animals used in the entertainment industry have been admired through the years from the iconic “Lassie” to “101 Dalmatians.” We love animals, we love to see them in movies and on television, but do we really know if they are being treated humanely on sets? Should animals be used for our entertainment?

The American Humane Association (AHA) runs the “No Animals Were Harmed” certification program which is supposed to ensure that animals used on film sets are being treating humanely. Films that take part in this program receive the label “no animals were harmed in the making of this film” in the credits — a statement many caring viewers have trusted for years.

However, the AHA is now under fire due to a new breaking investigation, with some pretty damning evidence, by The Hollywood Reporter.

Among some of the shocking violations of animal treatment detailed in the full report are the following:

A Husky dog was punched repeatedly in its diaphragm on Disney’s 2006 Antarctic sledding movie Eight Below, starring Paul Walker, and a chipmunk was fatally squashed in Paramount’s 2006 … romantic comedy Failure to Launch. In 2003, the AHA chose not to publicly speak of the dozens of dead fish and squid that washed up on shore over four days during the filming of Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. Crewmembers had taken no precautions to protect marine life when they set off special-effects explosions in the ocean, according to the AHA rep on set.

How does this abuse take place under AHA’s watch, and why does the AHA continue to give films and shows with egregious track records their stamp of approval? According to the report, the AHA has awarded its “No Animals Were Harmed” credit “to films and TV shows on which animals were injured during production. It justifies this on the grounds that the animals weren’t intentionally harmed or the incidents occurred while cameras weren’t rolling.”

These loopholes are how an astounding 27 animals died during the production of “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” from dehydration, exhaustion, and drowning in water-filled gullies. The film still received the AHA’s approval stating they had “monitored all of the significant animal action. No animals were harmed during such action.” This is true, in part. Since the deaths took place during a hiatus in filming, the AHA technically had no jurisdiction, although, arguably, it should really have looked after the animals from start to finish.

It appears as though the AHA has been failing to be a voice for animals on set, what’s more, according to Salon, “no films are required to have the AHA’s disclaimer, and because it’s a nonprofit, the AHA isn’t required to make its information publicly available the way federal monitors would.”

We may not ever be able to know if animals used for entertainment are being treated well, so what can we do? Animals in Film and TV provides these alternatives for filmmakers to consider as animal replacements which include computer generated imaging, animatronics, stock footage, filming existing events, filming animals in their natural habitats, and simply writing animals out of scripts. As a viewer, you can support also humane action like urging “Anchorman” to cut scenes from Seaworld in their film.

Update:The American Humane Association has published a statement responding to The Hollywood Reporter’s claims. Read the organization’s response here.

Related

Want to read more posts like this? Sign up for our newsletter below!​

Browse through some recent posts below:

Animal advocates can experience burn out when trying to combat all the serious issues plaguing our planet’s animals. But then there are some days when all that hard work truly pays off, and today is one of those days… Thanks to public protest, India has banned the live export of animals from all ports!

Helsinki Fashion Week is going in a direction that may prove to be game-changing for the fashion industry. The event has pledged to go leather-free starting in 2019! The move, following the widespread opposition to using fur among major fashions designers, is proof that the tides are finally turning against cruelty in fashion.

Just look at this cow being transported through the Middle East in the middle of summer. In desperate need of shade and water, the poor animal is stretching its neck out as far as possible in hopes of catching an unlikely breeze.

Fortunately, Tortellini was not one of those young animals. This little lamb was lucky enough to be found just in time by her rescuers and traveled to the sanctuary where she received her adorable name and what she needed most – safety.

Disclosure: One Green Planet accepts advertising, sponsorship, affiliate links and other forms of compensation, which may or may not influence the advertising content, topics or articles written on this site. Click here for more information.

5 comments on “New Report Finds ‘Plenty of Animals Harmed’ While Making Films”

I would have read the article except my AdBlocker thinks it's one giant ad. But, I agree, 'Plenty of Animals Harmed'. I've seen scenes that any reasonable person would know that the animals are harmed.

I never doubted for a minute that the animals we see in movies are harmed. It's obvious they are overworked and in harm's way many times. I hate seeing animals in movies because somehow I can feel their pain.
I haven't read the article yet and I am a little apprehensive to do it - I know I won't like what I am going to read.